> > My argument it is based on the truths that FISONs (1, ...,n) are> > identified (not only enumerated) by their last numbers n like polar> > vectors are identified by the points they point to. n = n is an> > identity.>> Your arguments are based on the structure of triangular numbers.

Nonsense.>> It is "obvious" by the same geometric reasoning you hope will> convince others that classical mathematics in its modern> conception is flawed.

Nonsense.>> So, in your denial you choose another geometric intuition.

> And, just for more kicks, here is what Leibniz had to> say about the principle of identity of indiscernibles> along with a definite interpretation of an individual> in a metric space according to Cantor:

No speech about geometry is required to recognize that 1, 2, 3, ..., nsimply is uniquely identified by n.>Regards, WM